The role of Government

[The Inquisitor]

The mental image I get when I think government is pointless bureaucracy, and hypocritical bigots fueled by the profit motive. The idea that government will trickle away over time, in a communist society, seems preposterous to me, and would probably cause a second revolution to establish a society without it because why would a government want to give up its power?

My question is, after the revolution, will Unions run everything? If they run everything will the Unions communicate and form one big Union? Sounds just like a fox with a grandma mask to me.

Will there be a zero tolerance for bull shit law that allows the people to assure that they don't get re-oppressed by a person corrupted with his new power?

Also, how do representatives fall in the horizontal hierarchy? They seemingly have more power.

I can fumble around in my head with possibilities and outcomes, but I figure it would be more beneficial to ask some more experienced socialist/communist. Also, pardon me if the sentences seem a bit jumpy and ill-concentrated. I've had a long day.

[ContrarianLemming]

well theres 3 good questions here, i'll take them in turn.

1. will unions run everything? That strongly depends on the ideology and framework of a communist society, for example, a syndicalist like myself might say "yes" but not in the sense that you describe, the unions are organs of the people, the people run everything. They might have one big union but you hint that this is a form of government or bureaucracy. The union of syndicates woud basically be identical to the communes, theres not even any point in discussing it.

2. BS laws: I think the only laws in place in a rational communist society would be ones that protect the liberty of the inidividual, ie: don't kill, don't kidnap. I read that New LAbour brought in a record over 2000 new laws in it's government in the UK, I somehow doubt any of those laws would exist in communism. The grand majority of laws are about protecting property rights.

3. representives: In communism, we wont have "representives" as such, we will have Delegates, the difference between a delegate and a representive is that a delegate has no real power, they are recallable, they are privy to the people above all ,there only duty is to present the views of there commune/region to the regional/nation/internation/interplanatary congress, ie: like the CNT.

[ComradeOm]

The mental image I get when I think government is pointless bureaucracy, and hypocritical bigots fueled by the profit motiveIf you have somehow compressed the incredibly complex and far-reaching role of the state into this brief description then I suggest that you revise your "mental image". I couldn't even begin to delve into the nuances of the state's role in and interaction with society


...why would a government want to give up its power?Because the state is primarily an instrument of class rule. With the disappearance of classes there is no reason for the state to continue to exist

Of course this does not necessarily mean that the state structures themselves will suddenly dissolve into some commune utopia. But at the very least the state will become 'depoliticised' and only concern itself with administrative tasks


My question is, after the revolution, will Unions run everything? If they run everything will the Unions communicate and form one big Union? Sounds just like a fox with a grandma mask to me. Depends on who you talk to. Syndicalists traditionally have viewed the unions as key organisations in revolution and post-revolution society. Others disagree

But what is your opposition to worker unions (or the 'one big union') coming together to manage administrative functions?


Will there be a zero tolerance for bull shit law that allows the people to assure that they don't get re-oppressed by a person corrupted with his new power?Question: if people corrupted by power are making new laws how can you rely on the law to control them?

Obviously you can't. Leaving aside the typical 'power corrupts' argument (which I in no way agree with) the safeguard against this scenario arising lies not in laws but the system itself. Any government that is truly based on and answerable to, in a democratic fashion, the people it represents cannot simply entrench itself in power. Think of measures like recalls, local soviets, and the like


Also, how do representatives fall in the horizontal hierarchy? They seemingly have more power.Well yes, representative democracy (whether parliamentary or soviet) does imply a hierarchy. Regardless of what you call these representatives

[The Inquisitor]

If you have somehow compressed the incredibly complex and far-reaching role of the state into this brief description then I suggest that you revise your "mental image". I couldn't even begin to delve into the nuances of the state's role in and interaction with society


Ha, sorry about that irrational description of government. I was just trying to set a scene in which to lay the question down, but I was talking about how it has become for the most part, not its potential.

Thanks for answering my questions, guys. I'm sure I'll be able to continue from here.